Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Brexit - Should they stay or should they go?
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1025 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 761 of 887 (862677)
09-10-2019 6:55 AM
Reply to: Message 738 by caffeine
09-04-2019 9:50 AM


Re: Brexit fact of the day
Johnson's government has managed to suffer more Commons defeats in one week than either Thatcher or Blair did in premierships that lasted more than a decade.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 738 by caffeine, posted 09-04-2019 9:50 AM caffeine has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 762 by Diomedes, posted 09-10-2019 9:44 AM caffeine has replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1025 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 763 of 887 (862699)
09-10-2019 2:48 PM
Reply to: Message 762 by Diomedes
09-10-2019 9:44 AM


Re: Brexit fact of the day
I wonder if there is an award for that.
I am curious what the next steps are going to be. Parliament is now in recess and Johnson is supposed to be going to the EU to broker a new deal. I doubt that will get much traction. His plan to use No Deal as a bargaining chip seems to now be gone. And he has emphatically stated he will not ask the EU for an extension despite technically now being mandated by law to do so if he has no new deal.
I am still wondering if the EU might just decide to end this charade and not grant another extension. Macron has hinted at this, although he may be grandstanding. But from where I sit, it seems the EU is holding all the cards right now. So I wouldn't be surprised if they simply denied the extension and told the UK that they either need to accept the deal already in place or revoke Article 50. Put all the onus on them.
It's not as if the possibility of leaving without a deal is gone. All the current legislation does is require the PM to request an extension if Parliament does not approve a deal; or exiting without a deal; by mid-October. If the European Council refuses an extension then exiting without a deal on 31st remains the default outcome.
ABE - and I intentionally wrote 'European Council' rather than EU above for a reason. People often talk about 'the EU' as if such a thing exists as a decision-making entity, but it doesn't. When we're saying what 'the EU' will do, it's important to remember what actual institution (and by extension, which actual people) we mean in a given situation.
In this case, it means the European Council; and importantly any decision to change anything already agreed upon with the UK (including the departure date) would require unanimity in the Council. So, for the EU to refuse an extension it only actually requires one of the 27 national governments to do so.
Edited by caffeine, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 762 by Diomedes, posted 09-10-2019 9:44 AM Diomedes has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 764 by RAZD, posted 09-11-2019 7:41 AM caffeine has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1025 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


(1)
Message 766 of 887 (862714)
09-11-2019 8:01 AM
Reply to: Message 765 by jar
09-11-2019 7:47 AM


Re: Brexit fact of the day
It's Heads of Government, rather than Heads of State (with a couple of exceptions for countries like France with funny constitutions).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 765 by jar, posted 09-11-2019 7:47 AM jar has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1025 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


(1)
Message 768 of 887 (862716)
09-11-2019 9:01 AM
Reply to: Message 767 by RAZD
09-11-2019 8:38 AM


Re: EU Council
Interesting. Who came up with that idea?
It evolved organically. Long before the Council was a formally defined entity, government leaders in the member states of the European Communities would meet periodically to discuss plans for the functioning of Europe and the direction of future integration. This was formalised with the Maastricht Treaty, which defined three key institutions that would be the pillars of the EU.
The Commission is supposed to represent the interests of the Union, the Council the interests of its member states, and the Parliament the interests of its citizens.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 767 by RAZD, posted 09-11-2019 8:38 AM RAZD has seen this message but not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1025 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 799 of 887 (867748)
12-02-2019 4:43 PM
Reply to: Message 797 by Diomedes
12-02-2019 12:13 PM


Re: Boris Johnson Set for 68-Seat Majority According to YouGov Poll
I have to admit, that is somewhat surprising. I had actually assumed we might be headed for a hung parliament. But sounds like Labour and Corbyn are not doing a good job at wooing voters.
I don't find this surprising at all - this was the obvious and expected outcome.
Brexit supporters in the north and midlands who supported Labour last time in the safe and comforting support that Brexit was going through anyway no longer feel that security. A lot of voters are sick and tired of the whole Brexit mess, and Johnson is in the luxury position of being able to promote a simple 'let's get Brexit done' message; and present himself as the man who's been sensibly fighting for that against an obstinate and out of touch elite. Labour have no simple message to contest with that.
Remember that the Tories only need about 40% of the vote to get a convincing majority. How could this election go any other way?
Swinson is a fucking moron.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 797 by Diomedes, posted 12-02-2019 12:13 PM Diomedes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 800 by AZPaul3, posted 12-02-2019 9:13 PM caffeine has not replied
 Message 803 by Diomedes, posted 12-03-2019 9:48 AM caffeine has replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1025 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 804 of 887 (867880)
12-04-2019 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 803 by Diomedes
12-03-2019 9:48 AM


Re: Boris Johnson Set for 68-Seat Majority According to YouGov Poll
I honestly don't have enough requisite information on the demographics and voting patterns of the UK. But I guess my surprise was that with all the talk about Brexit and the Tories bungling things during May's tenure as PM, I had assumed that there would have been a shift in sentiment. Clearly that was not the case.
People were indeed disgusted with May's bungling of Brexit, but she's already gone. Johnson has come in presenting himself as the sensible voice of normal people willing to take care of things and 'get Brexit done'. He wants to use this election to say to people 'I just want to get on with things and enact the will of the British people, and look how all these politicians are interfering and making a mess'. Important thing to realise is that most people are just tired of Brexit. It's dominated the news in Britain now for years - literally - and so this is a simple and appealing message to voters.
My 'only expected outcome' rant wasn't directed at you. I'm ranting about people in Britain who should know better.
Once again, very minimal knowledge of Jo Swinson or her platform. I know initially she stated she would 'cancel Brexit'. Maybe not the best verbiage to use. And I think she also said she won't back Corbyn.
Swinson threw herself into this campaign in the deluded but, as far as I can see, genuine belief that the Liberal Democrats can actually win. This is pretty absurd on its face. The electoral arithmetic has always been against the Liberal Democrats, and I struggle to understand how she could not be intimately familiar with this fact - given her job. A huge surge in Lib Dem votes means a relatively moderate rise in representation, because their votes are so dispersed. You need regional concentration to win in a FPTP, single-member consituency system. This is not news - consider the 1983 election, when Labour got 209 seats with 27.6% of the vote, and the Liberal/SDP alliance (which would later become the Liberal Democrats) got 23 seats with 25.4% of the vote.
Swinson seems to believe that everyone opposed to Brexit will switch to voting Lib Dem in order to ensure it does not happen, which is frankly delusional and completely ignores the millions of people with tribal loyalties or who care about other things more than Brexit. And more, it completely ignores the even more central fact that the Tories can secure, and have in the past secured, huge majorities with a little over 40% of the popular vote.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 803 by Diomedes, posted 12-03-2019 9:48 AM Diomedes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 805 by Diomedes, posted 12-05-2019 12:01 PM caffeine has seen this message but not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1025 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 818 of 887 (868540)
12-13-2019 6:18 PM
Reply to: Message 816 by Diomedes
12-13-2019 9:07 AM


Things that should be emphasised
Coverage of election results is always awful. Journalists seem incapable of comprehending numbers. Thankfully, I'm here. Things that should be realised:
The Conservative gain (in terms of votes) was small.
What the results mean is big, however. The only way to explain the results is millions of Labour voters switching to Conservative, with millions of Conservative voters switching to Lib Dem.
Because the British election system is designed in such a way that you matter less depending on where you live, this means a small net increase in votes means a large majority. It also means (in my opinion) that Brexit decided the election. Pro-Brexit Labour voters voted Tory and transformed the electoral map of Britain. Pro-Remain Tory voters voted Lib Dem and had no impact on the result; because in British democracy most people don't matter.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 816 by Diomedes, posted 12-13-2019 9:07 AM Diomedes has not replied

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1025 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 834 of 887 (871263)
01-30-2020 4:49 PM
Reply to: Message 833 by Theodoric
01-30-2020 4:09 PM


Re: European Parliament backs terms of UK exit
The UK is screwed. Best thing Scotland can do is leave the UK and join EU.
No, because most of Scotland's business is with England. That would be silly.
I venture to guess the UK is going to be Kansas on steroids.
Because it differs from Kansas by having a GDP and a population an order of magnitude higher, and a totally different regulatory structure, economic base and political situation?
So not so much, 'Kansas on steroids' as 'nothing at all like Kansas'.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 833 by Theodoric, posted 01-30-2020 4:09 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 835 by Theodoric, posted 01-30-2020 5:04 PM caffeine has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024